RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second cause of cancer-related death in the Western world. Much of the CRC genetic risk remains unidentified and may be attributable to a large number of common, low-penetrance genetic variants. Genetic linkage studies in CRC families have reported additional association with regions 9q22-31, 3q21-24, 7q31, 11q, 14q and 22q. There are several plausible candidate genes for CRC susceptibility within the aforementioned linkage regions including PTCH1, XPA and TGFBR1 in 9q22-31, and EPHB1 and MRAS in 3q21-q24. METHODS: CRC cases and matched controls were from EPICOLON, a prospective, multicentre, nationwide Spanish initiative, composed of two independent phases. Phase 1 corresponded to 515 CRC cases and 515 controls, whereas phase 2 consisted of 901 CRC cases and 909 controls. Genotyping was performed for 172 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 84 genes located within regions 9q22-31 and 3q21-q24. RESULTS: None of the 172 SNPs analysed in our study could be formally associated with CRC risk. However, rs1444601 (TOPBP1) and rs13088006 (CDV3) in region 3q22 showed interesting results and may have an effect on CRC risk. CONCLUSIONS: TOPBP1 and CDV3 genetic variants on region 3q22 may modulate CRC risk. Further validation and meta-analysis should be undertaken in larger CRC cohorts.
Assuntos
Cromossomos Humanos Par 3 , Cromossomos Humanos Par 9 , Neoplasias Colorretais/genética , Predisposição Genética para Doença , Idoso , Antígenos CD/genética , Proteínas de Transporte/genética , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Proteínas de Ligação a DNA/genética , Proteínas Ligadas por GPI/genética , Estudos de Associação Genética , Humanos , Masculino , Proteínas Nucleares/genética , Polimorfismo de Nucleotídeo Único , Semaforinas/genéticaRESUMO
AIM: Some retrospective studies have shown a lack of benefit of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with mismatch repair (MMR) deficient colorectal cancer. Our aim was to assess if this molecular marker can predict benefit from 5-FU adjuvant chemotherapy. A second objective was to determine if MMR status influences short term survival. METHODS: We included 754 patients with a median follow up of 728.5 days (range 1-1097). A total of 260 patients with stage II or III tumours received 5-FU adjuvant chemotherapy, according to standard clinical criteria and irrespective of their MMR status. A tumour was considered MMR deficient when either BAT-26 showed instability or there was loss of MLH1 or MSH2 protein expression. RESULTS: At the end of the follow up period, 206 patients died and 120 presented with tumour recurrence. Sixty six (8.8%) patients had MMR deficient tumours. There were no significant differences in overall survival (MMR competent 72.1%; MMR deficient 78.8%; p = 0.3) or disease free survival (MMR competent 61.3%; MMR deficient 72.3%; p = 0.08). In patients with stage II and III tumours, benefit from 5-FU adjuvant chemotherapy was restricted to patients with MMR competent tumours (overall survival: chemotherapy 87.1%; non-chemotherapy 73.5%; log rank, p = 0.00001). Patients with MMR deficient tumours did not benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy (overall survival: chemotherapy 89.5%; non-chemotherapy 82.4%; log rank, p = 0.4). CONCLUSIONS: Benefit from 5-FU adjuvant chemotherapy depends on the MMR status of tumours in patients with colorectal cancer. 5-FU adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival in patients with MMR competent tumours but this benefit from chemotherapy cannot be extended to patients with MMR deficient tumours.